Sunday, May 31, 2009

Thursday was Zoe's last day of school, and Friday was Maya's preschool graduation. Maya and her friends looked adorable in their miniature caps and gowns, and as silly as it might be to "graduate" at this age, Maya was cute as a button!

So Zoe is now "officially" a third-grader and Maya a kindergartner. Happy times, yes? For Zoe, not so much.

When I picked Zoe up from school on Thursday, unlike all the other kids running happily from school celebrating the beginning of summer vacation, Zoe was crying. A few other kids were crying about missing their second-grade teacher, but Zoe was concerned about her first grade teacher. Mrs. P. is having a baby and is not coming back next year. Zoe was crying about never seeing her again, and about how she'll forget what Mrs. P. looks like. And then Friday, as Maya graduated from the same preschool Zoe attended, Zoe cried about two of her preschool teachers who are no longer with the school, and whom she hasn't seen since they left. "I don't even remember what Miss Rachel looks like," Zoe cried.

Normal drama-queen stuff? Could be, she's had a hard time with Maya graduating, because that makes Maya the center of attention instead of her! Usual reaction to change? I suppose.

But that's what adoption does, it makes you wonder if there's something else, another layer. Is this just about her teachers, or is there something more? Is she thinking about not remembering/knowing what her birth parents look like? Is this a reaction to abandonment? Is this triggering feelings of loss, traceable to loss of birth parents?

I don't know the answers, but adoption means I have to ask the questions.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

In adoption, and perhaps especially transracial adoption, being alike/being different is a recurrent theme. Here's a fairly typical conversation, shared by Dawn at This Woman's Work:

The other day Madison said to me, “Lucia looks like you.”

Lucia is my niece and Madison is right — Lucia does look like me. She looks exactly like my sister and my sister and I don’t look that alike but we must a little becauseLucia looks just like my sister and a little like me. She definitely has my coloring. So I agreed with Madison. Then she said, “And I don’t like it! I want to look like you!”

I told her the truth.

“Well, I’m glad you don’t look like me because you’re prettier than I am.”

“Oh Mommy! You’re pretty, too,” she told me.

“I am,” I agreed. “I am very good looking but you are better looking. You’re downright beautiful. I love having such a beautiful daughter.”

Then we hugged a bunch and she seemed satisfied.

Zoe's first I-want-to-look-like-you conversation was actually really funny. She was 3, and had gotten her hair cut short and looked adorable. We're driving (always in the car, these conversations!), and she says, "I want to get a hair cut again." I explained she just got a hair cut and we wouldn't get another one for weeks and weeks. She replied, "But I want my hair like yours." Mine was super-short, and I answered, "Oh, sweetie, you don't want yours as short as mine!" Her immediate reply, "No! I want it to be GRAY!" Ouch!

I was talking to a friend today and another alike/difference issue came up. Her daughter, adopted from China, seems to be in a rejection phase when it comes to her birth mother. She insists that her adopted mom is her "only mom." As we talked, she mentioned that her daughter describes her birth mother (who, of course, is completely unknown to her) as wearing a flowered dress and high heels, and having long hair.

We were speculating about where this description came from, and I asked my friend, "When was the last time you wore a flowered dress and high heels (being pretty sure I knew what the answer was!)?" And the immediate answer was "long before my daughter came home from China." Aha! I'm thinking her daughter is making sure her birth mom and adopted mom are in separate boxes, being completely different from each other. (As you know, I'm not a psychologist, I only play one on blogs!)

So how has being alike/being different come up in your household? Please share your conversations in the comments.

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Very interesting results in the poll on ethical adoption -- thanks to everyone who voted, and a special thanks to all who commented! We had more comments to the ethical adoption post than on any previous blog entry. We also had a grand total of 59 people vote in the three polls.

I deliberately made the poll personal, in the hope of spurring some personal reflection on what would make an adoption ethical. In retrospect, that may have been a miscalculation -- many of the comments tended toward defensiveness, and the voting may have, too. Asking about adoptions-in-general might have allowed for cooler reflection. By making it personal, we may have shed more heat than light on the issues! Still, in the adoption world as in so many other aspects of life, the personal is political. Changes in policy and practice is likely to come about only because of the efforts of those intimately involved in adoption.

Of course, the poll results are not scientifically reliable since the respondents were all self-selecting. And I'd like to think that those who come to this blog might be a bit more savvy on some of these issues than the garden-variety triad member (there's egotism for you!). Still, I think the effort was worth-while and the results illuminating.

First, some combined results.

Approximately 51% of adoptive parents, birth family members and adopted persons combined agreed or strongly agreed that the adoption they were involved in was ethical. About 18% of the three groups combined disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that the adoption they were involved in was ethical. That left about 31% who were not sure.

When broken down by group, the results were a little different.

Adoptive parents: 58% agreed or strongly agreed that their adoption was ethical.Adopted persons: 33% agreed or strongly agreed that their adoption was ethical.Birth families: 27% agreed or strongly agreed that their adoption was ethical.

Anyone surprised by that breakdown? I pretty much expected that adoptive parents would be more inclined to believe that their adoption was ethical. It may be because adoptive parents are more in control of the adoption process than other members of the triad; that control lets them take steps to ensure the adoption is ethical, and it is likely to make them defensive and avoidant when questions of the ethics of adoption are raised. That control also means that adoptive parents tend to have more information than other members of the triad (click here to read about Suz's and Margie's presentation at the AAC conference about the difference in information and paperwork between a prospective birth mother and a prospective adoptive mother). And because they are the big winners in adoption, adoptive parents would be more likely to have a positive impression of the process, which would naturally extend to the belief that their adoption was ethical.

If anything surprised me in the results, it was the large "Not Sure" number. In aggregate, 30.5% were not sure whether their adoption was ethical. Adopted persons (33%) and birth family members (36%) were a bit more unsure than the adoptive parents (28%).

Wouldn't we all want to be sure that our adoptions were ethical? So why aren't we? Some of the commenters suggest one reason -- in international adoption in particular, it is hard to access the FACTS that would answer the question. Another reason expressed was that we're unsure about the RULES that should govern adoptions to make them ethical. As to facts, we have to rely on agencies. But for the rules, we can formulate on our own the elements that would make an adoption ethical.

If you want to read more about ethical adoption, I'd recommend two sites: PEAR (Parents for Ethical Adoption Reform) and Ethica. You can also find the summary of proceedings from the 1999 Ethics in Adoption Conference sponsored by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute (the proceedings of the 2007 conference don't appear to be available) by clicking here.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

First world demand to adopt very young babies is driving a new twist in peoplesmuggling, particularly in Asia.One of Australia's senior law officers says more and more, smugglers are trading in pregnant women - the perfect incubators - for access to their newborns. Australia's Chief Federal Magistrate John Pascoe is presenting a paper on the issue to the LawAsia conference in Singapore, which is looking at children and the law.

Pascoe says this trafficking of pregnant women for access to their babies is a growing trend, and puts the numbers "in the thousands rather than in tens or hundreds."

It reminds me of an incident several years ago in Texas. As I remember the details, an adoption agency was encouraging women from Mexico to cross the border illegally to have their babies and relinquish them in the U.S. so that the adoptions could be handled as domestic adoptions rather than more difficult international adoptions. Certainly not as bad as the Australian report of trafficking, but still troubling. Anyone else remember more details of the U.S. case? I haven't been able to track anything down on it.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

OK, I try to stay pretty focused on adoption issues when I blog; I'm just not a "cute kid" blogger (despite the overwhelming cuteness of my kids!), I guess. But I couldn't resist this one.

I pick Maya up from school Friday, and out of the blue (or so I thought!) as we're driving she asks, "What are those circle things you use to cover your nipples?" What?! My 5-year-old just asked me about pasties?! Where did she see pasties? Did some teacher at school have a "wardrobe malfunction?" I can guar-an-teeeeeee that I don't wear pasties!!! This is even more surprising than the Great Penis Incident of 2009 for age-inappropriate knowledge!

Ohhhhh, now I definitely get it. As we pulled out of the parking lot of her preschool I saw a woman wearing a string bikini top with shorts as she did yard work. I barely noticed, but Maya clearly noticed! Yep, she was wearing round things to cover her breasts. At least now I can breathe again . . . .

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Another proud Texan moment -- this time it is Rep. Louie Gohmert of Tyler, Texas, complaining that if we send money to China to save endangered species, we'd end up with moo goo dog pan or moo goo cat pan. Sigh.

Angry Asian Man says not funny, and provides a full transcript of the remarks.

From Third Mom, a suggestion for how adoptive parents should respond to reports of corruption in international adoption:

There is, in my opinion, no other response for an adoptive parent to make to allegations of the existence of intercountry adoption corruption than to agree. We then have a further responsibility to get under what that means, learn to recognize it, speak out against it, and understand our role in it. This neither diminishes our families nor undermines ethical transnational adoptions.

It would do my heart good if one day an article like Graff's could be met by adoptive parents with praise first of all for shedding light on this problem, followed by reasoned critique and dialog on how we collectively can bring intercountry adoption corruption to an end.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Plastic Surgeries Increase Among MinoritiesCosmetic procedures are on the rise within all minority groups, according to a report from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. But some question whether the growing number of surgeries reflect an even bigger desire: to look more European, or "white." Two plastic surgeons discuss the trend.

Salon Teaches White Parents To Care For Black HairMany white parents who adopt black children struggle with caring for their child's hair. Althea Reynolds, owner of the Spice Salon in Los Angeles, sees the parents' challenge as an opportunity to offer valuable lessons in black hair care. Reynolds talks about her new series of workshops.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

I've been thinking a lot lately about what makes an adoption ethical -- in both U.S. domestic adoption and international adoption. I'm starting from the proposition that "ethical adoption" is NOT an oxymoron, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise! I'd like a lot of input, so I thought I'd "incentivize" you by adding a poll asking your opinion of your own adoption -- was it ethical? I've divided it up for birth family, adoptive family, and adopted persons.

Here are some questions to help in thinking about some of the issues, but I'm sure I've overlooked a lot, so point out what I've missed, please!

Birth Parents

What does it mean to relinquish voluntarily? Does poverty and powerlessness call into question voluntariness? Or does coercion only matter if done by APs and/or agencies? Lies and false promises to birth parents are coercive, yes? Should birth families be offered help to parent before a relinquishment is deemed voluntary? Does China get a "pass"in terms of ethical issues since birth parents choices are constrained by law? When, if ever, is it justified to give birth parents money in relation to relinquishment? Should minors be allowed to relinquish? Should psychological counseling be required both prior to and following relinquishment? Should relinquishments be signed in the presence of a judicial officer? Is openness -- continuing contact and/or sharing of information -- necessary to make adoption ethical?

Adopted Persons

What is an orphan? Does the existence of extended family make a difference? Is foster care always inadequate to adoption? Should there be a preference for domestic over international adoption? for same-race over transracial adoption? What steps should be required to ensure children are not trafficked? Is "best interest of the child" adequate protection for children in adoption? When children are abandoned, is there an obligation to search for birth family before the child is adoptable? Whose obligation is it? Is openness -- in terms of both information and continuing contact -- an ethical imperative in adoption? How should matching happen? Is centralized government matching preferable to pre-ID'd matches? Does private adoption adequately protect children? Should there be different rules for newborn adoption and older child adoption? Is it ethical to have different fee structures depending on the race of the child?

Adoptive Parents

What screening is necessary for ethical adoptions? Should adoptions by single parents and gay and lesbian couples be allowed? What pre-adoption education requirements are appropriate? What information should APs be able to access about adoption agencies, social workers, attorneys, etc.? What disclosure about fees and fee changes are appropriate? What information about the child should be available before an adoption decision is made? Can there be ethical adoption without post-adoption services -- like counseling, parenting guidance, medical and educational information, etc. -- being made available to adoptive families? Should adoption agencies provide reunion services?

Well, there's a start! Help me out in the comments. And vote in the appropriate poll!

Excellent article by Johanna Oreskovic & Trish Maskew, Red Thread or Slender Reed: Deconstructing Prof. Bartholet's Mythology of International Adoption. The article that corrals the various arguments I touched on in my Supply and Demand post, and does it far better than I ever could! FYI, Elizabeth Bartholet is a professor at Harvard Law School who is also a parent through international adoption. Oreskovic & Maskew are also adoptive parents, and former board members of Ethica, an organization dedicated to ethical adoption. Here's an excerpt from the introduction:

In her recent piece, “International Adoption: Thoughts on Human Rights Issues,” Professor Elizabeth Bartholet leaves no doubt where she stands: International adoption should be if not the preferred alternative, then at least a preferred alternative for the “millions on millions” of children in the developing world who would otherwise be doomed to living out their childhoods in damaging institutionsor on the streets. She believes that structuring legal regimes in ways that enable as many children as possible to avoid such fates should be at the core of any human rights-based discussion of international adoption.

* * *

[S]he maintains that discourse and policy-making on international adoption are controlled by a human rights community at worst hostile to, and at best profoundly suspicious of, international adoption. Bartholet accuses this community, and particularly entities like UNICEF and the Committee on the Rights of the Child, of setting up legal, ideological, and rhetorical roadblocks to international adoption. In her view, this community’s anti-adoption attitude is based on little more than naive romanticism of “culture” and unreflective hostility toward a perceived “colonialism” deemed inherent in transferring children from the developing to the developed world. Bartholet contends that not only is this discourse blind to the pragmatic realities of suffering children, it is based on overestimates of abuses in the international adoption process.

* * *

Like Bartholet, we are international adoptive parents, and like Bartholet, we place ourselves in the camp of those generally supportive of international adoption. Where we part company with her is in our characterization of the bigger picture. Bartholet’s position seems appealing because it relegates to the periphery of the analysis disturbing and problematic questions that should be at its core, specifically troubling practices like child-buying, coercion of vulnerable birth parents, weak regulatory structures, and profiteering. Our analysis breaks little new theoretical ground, and we do not propose programmatic solutions. Rather we identify and explore complexities that Bartholet for the most part ignores, but which are central to the viability and integrity of any international adoption process. To that end, we address the following questions: First, whether Bartholet’s claim that there are millions of adoptable children “in institutions and on the streets” has sufficient empirical support to be credible? (Part I). Second, to what extent does the private adoption agency system actually serve the needs of children, maintain the integrity of theadoption process, and protect the rights of children, birth, and adoptive families? (Part II) To what extent do existing legal frameworks in sending countries and in theUS, specifically the Immigration and Nationality Act’s (INA) orphan provisions and the Hague Convention, provide the overlapping layers of protection against abuses that Bartholet claims exist? (Part III) To what extent does the available evidence support Bartholet’s contention that abuses like child buying, kidnapping, and coercion in international adoptions are over-estimated? (Part IV). And finally, is Bartholet correct when she argues that issues of culture, heritage, identity, and integrity of process should, in effect, be relegated to the background of any analysis of international adoption? (Part V). We contend that the available evidence, while clearly incomplete, offers virtually no support for any of Bartholet’s contentions.

Monday, May 18, 2009

The U.S. and Mexico have had a longstanding wrangle over who's to blame for drug smuggling and all its attendant evil of violence and crime and death. The U.S. takes the position that the problem is Mexico's -- if Mexico did not supply the drugs, there would be no demand. Mexico takes the position that the problem is the U.S.'s -- if the U.S. did not demand the drugs, there would be no supply.

While supply and demand are crass terms to apply to international adoption, the parallels are clear. Some argue that people from the West adopt so many children from abroad because there is a constant supply -- so many orphans abroad, created by poverty, war, famine, disease, and/or policies or cultural practices of the sending countries. Others argue that the demand from the West creates orphans, that it's the monetary incentive to adoption agencies and orphanages that creates orphans where orphans used to be simply poor children living with their families.

Take India, for example. Adoption facilitators would approach poor families and offer the families what would be a fortune to them, and a drop in the bucket to us, to relinquish the child. Isn't that the creation of an orphan?

What about Guatemala, where there have been some reports of women getting pregnant so that they can relinquish the child and earn the fee for international adoption, while the prevalence of baby-stealing is so great the U.S. requires DNA testing to match relinquishing mothers and children. Isn't this a system that creates orphans?

[I don't want to impose a moral judgment on women and families who make the decision to relinquish for a fee. In the midst of abject poverty, it may be seen as the only way for the family and other children to survive. Certainly, people have choices in life, and it's a choice even when it is a difficult one. But it's hard to find a "forced choice" to be free choice. The real problem is the traffickers offering this money, knowing its coercive force.]

I know that the incidents I've linked to above are not the whole picture, but there is little doubt that they are part of the picture. Babies with families are being turned into orphans so that they can be adopted by foreigners who will pay a great deal of money for that adoption. We don't know the scope of the problem, because purchased and stolen babies have the same paperwork as true orphans.

So what do we do about it? Do we end the demand to control the supply -- bar international adoption? Do we work harder at global aid for struggling families to end the supply?

The biggest response to both possibilites is -- what do we do in the meantime? Assuming that cutting the demand would end -- or seriously reduce -- the supply, how long will it take to do so? And even if we had the public will to increase international aid, how long will it take to trickle down to vulnerable families? And what do we do with all of those orphans in the meantime?

Sunday, May 17, 2009

OK, here's my ultimate adoption book list! I've mentioned that I'm pretty OCD about adoption books for kids, right? Well, we actually own all of these books, which is completely ridiculous.

I thought it might be helpful to try to categorize them. I tried to come up with all the possible adoption topics, and then arranged the books accordingly. A lot of these topics are only mentioned, and if mentioned, I've included it. I've put a star if I think a book has done a particularly good job. Also, I've only put a hot-link the first time I mentioned the book, so if you see one under a heading that interests you, look up the list and you'll find a link to it.

Have fun! Tell us about your favorites, and let me know if you've got something that belongs on the list!

GriefThe Mulberry Bird *Before I Met YouNever Never Never Will She Stop Loving You

LossThe Mulberry BirdNever Never Never Will She Stop Loving YouDid My First Mother Love Me?

LoveThe Best Single Mom in the WorldThe Mulberry BirdMommy Far, Mommy NearWhen You Were Born in ChinaMade in China: A Story of AdoptionAdoption Is For AlwaysNever Never Never Will She Stop Loving You *Did My First Mother Love Me?Motherbridge of Love

Birth SiblingsKids Like Me in ChinaWe Adopted You, Benjamin Koo *At Home in this World *

Placement Reasons

GeneralThe Best Single Mom in the WorldKids Like Me in China *All About AdoptionOver the MoonMade in China: A Story of AdoptionAdoption Is For AlwaysThe Whole MeDid My First Mother Love Me?At Home in this World

Too YoungThe Mulberry Bird *Tell Me Again About the Night I Was BornAdoption Is For Always

Twice Upon-a-TimeNever Never Never Will She Stop Loving You

Single ParenthoodThe Mulberry Bird *

Twice Upon-a-Time

When You Were Born in ChinaAdoption Is For AlwaysNever Never Never Will She Stop Loving You

HomelessnessThe Mulberry Bird

PovertyWhen You Were Born in China

Child’s Illness/DisabilityKids Like Me in ChinaWhen You Were Born in China

Death/Illness/Disability of ParentBefore I Met YouAt Home in this WorldHorace

One Child PolicyThree Names of MeMommy Far, Mommy NearKids Like Me in China *Before I Met YouWhen You Were Born in China *At Home in this World *

Social Preference for BoysKids Like Me in China *Before I Met YouWhen You Were Born in ChinaAt Home in this World

Abandonment (Method of Placement)Kids Like Me in ChinaAn Mei's Strange and Wondrous Journey *Before I Met You *

GeneralThe Best Single Mom in the World *Mommy Far, Mommy NearA Blessing From AboveI Love You Like Crazy CakesOur Baby From ChinaLet’s Talk About It: AdoptionHoraceMama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishMy Family is ForeverHow I Was AdoptedI Wished For YouMotherbridge of Love

InfertilityMommy Far, Mommy NearTell Me Again About the Night I Was Born *

Screening/Application

General I Love You Like Crazy CakesMama’s Wish/Daughter’s Wish

AgencyThe Best Single Mom in the World *All About AdoptionMy Family is ForeverHow I Was AdoptedAdoption Is For Always

Referral/The CallHappy Adoption DayThe Best Single Mom in the WorldMommy Far, Mommy NearI Love You Like Crazy CakesThrough Moon and Stars and Night SkiesOur Baby From ChinaAll About AdoptionTell Me Again About the Night I Was Born *Mama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishHow I Was AdoptedWe Adopted You, Benjamin KooI Wished For YouOver the Moon *

TravelHappy Adoption DayThe Best Single Mom in the WorldI Love You Like Crazy CakesOur Baby From ChinaOver the MoonWhite Swan Express *Tell Me Again About the Night I Was BornMama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishMy Family is ForeverWe Adopted You, Benjamin Koo

First MeetingThe Best Single Mom in the WorldThree Names of MeMommy Far, Mommy NearI Love You Like Crazy Cakes *Through Moon and Stars and Night Skies *Our Baby From ChinaAll About AdoptionOver the MoonWhite Swan ExpressTell Me Again About the Night I Was BornMama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishMy Family is ForeverHow I Was AdoptedAdoption Is For AlwaysWe Adopted You, Benjamin KooI Wished For YouAn Mei's Strange and Wondrous Journey (meeting dad)

Returning HomeHappy Adoption DayThree Names of MeI Love You Like Crazy CakesThrough Moon and Stars and Night Skies *Our Baby From ChinaOver the MoonWhite Swan ExpressTell Me Again About the Night I Was BornMama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishHow I Was AdoptedAn Mei's Strange and Wondrous Journey *

Confusion/Nervousness/FearThe Mulberry BirdThrough Moon and Stars and Night Skies *All About AdoptionBefore I Met You *The Whole MeAdoption Is For AlwaysEmma’s Yucky Brother *We Adopted You, Benjamin KooAt Home in this World

LossThe Mulberry BirdThree Names of MeWe See the Moon *Kids Like Me in China *All About AdoptionBefore I Met You

Questions/Curiosity about Birth FamilyThe Mulberry BirdAn Mei's Strange and Wondrous JourneyAt Home in this World *Three Names of Me *We See the Moon *Kids Like Me in ChinaAll About AdoptionBefore I Met YouLet’s Talk About It: AdoptionMy Family is ForeverAdoption Is For AlwaysThe Whole MeWe Adopted You, Benjamin Koo

An American Face *Made in China: A Story of AdoptionWe Adopted You, Benjamin Koo *I Wished For YouMotherbridge of Love

At Home in this WorldEvery Year on Your Birthday

Single

The Little Green Goose (single dad)I Love You Like Crazy Cakes *White Swan ExpressThe Best Single Mom in the Whole World *A Blessing From AboveWhite Swan ExpressMama’s Wish/Daughter’s WishI Wished For YouMotherbridge of Love

Friday, May 15, 2009

There are many hard truths of adoption, all of which our children own. After all, it is their story. And age appropriately we share with them so they have the knowledge they need to take into the world with them.

And some things may turn out to be unexpectedly difficult or hard for our children that we need to learn to wrap our heads around in order to walk the path with them.

Tonight, on the way to dinner, out of the blue, our 11 yo asked if we knew any information about where she was found. We have talked about this before, but tonight she was ready to listen at another level. I don’t know what sparked the question. She had spent time with a friend today, but she did not say they talked about anything. Perhaps it was just seeing someone in their birth family.

I remember the first time I used the word ‘abandon’ or ‘abandonment’ with my children. It was a hard word to get out of my mouth, but after a while, it becomes easier, just as it was easy to think in my thoughts.

I can’t count the number of times people have said to me things like: they don’t like girls in China — they abandon or kill their girls in China. And I have asked them if they have ever been in China. (No.) The truth is something far different.

My girls have also had it said to them in school.

What good would it do them not to know the real facts or for me to gloss over them? They will grow up, and then they will know that I was not trustworthy.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

A funny comment from Zoe, as we were looking for a gift bag for my mom's birthday present yesterday (Happy 70th Birthday, Mimi!). My mom is from France.

After looking at EVERY SINGLE ONE in the store, Zoe said, "Well, I like the black and white one, but THIS one is from her culture." She pulled out the bag with the Eiffel Tower on it.

I admit, I found this hysterically funny. Only a child of transcultural adoption would say this! Of course, I didn't let on to Zoe that I found her comment amusing. I just complimented her on a great selection!

As difficult as it can be for transculturally adopted children to mediate cultural conflicts, it has a benefit that I wish would extend to all children -- sensitivity to culture and difference.

From CNN, a profile of two quake survivors orphaned by the quake, Year later: New beginning for survivors. Money quote: "Like so many families of Sichuan orphans, they refuse to put them up for adoption but do not have the means to care for them, either."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Slate, a photo essay about international adoption, The Orphan Trade: A look at families affected by corrupt international adoptions. The article is by E.J. Graff of "The Lie We Love" fame.

Monday, May 11, 2009

Thanks to Mimi for the great photos! Here are the girls hamming it up back stage before the recital. The ballet was Alice in Wonderland, and Maya was a violet and Zoe one of the royal children of the Queen of Heart's court. We love our studio, since the recital is always a full ballet, with each class loosely integrated into the performance. The girls learn so much about how a ballet is put together as they attend rehearsals with all the big kids and grownups and see how their dance fits into the whole. It makes for a busy April and May, but we think it's worth it!

Zoe does a Degas-esque pose back stage, gazing dreamily into the mirror. Cllick here if you want to see the really cute series of Degas photos the professional photographer did of Zoe's whole class.

Maya does her mirror-gazing at my parents' house after the 2:00 performance -- Zoe still had one performance to go!

Maya looking gorgeous as a violet at Friday's dress rehearsal. None of the dress rehearsal photos turned out well -- bad lighting and distance made for fuzzy photos (I'm responsible for these, not the talented Mimi!). We had the staging rehearsal on Wednesday night and the dress on Friday night -- long nights and tired girls!

Zoe on stage during the dress rehearsal -- she spotted me just as I took the photo, and gave me a big smile. She actually smiled through both performances as well. She obviously had a GREAT time!

My kids are of the age that I've been Mother's Day-ed all week! Maya started hinting about her Mother's Day project at school LAST week -- "You can't come in the classroom, you'd see it!" A few days later, "It's a pot. But it's a surprise." A few days later, "It has polka dots." Then she decided to trick me, "I planted a tulip (my favorite flower, as she knows) in the pot. Not really!" Then Friday she can bring the polka-dot pot without a tulip home, and she immediately takes it out of the bag to give me -- we can't WAIT for Mother's Day, after all And no, it doesn't have a tulip. They grew grass!

Zoe gave me a Mother's Day card she made at school on Wednesday, even though I suggested she wait for Mother's Day. Nope, can't wait. Thursday she asks, "Is 9:30 OK for serving you breakfast on Mother's Day?" (Note to self, go to grocery store and buy something she can make me for Mother's Day breakfast!) Friday she proudly shows me a bag: "It has your present in it!" (I thought it was something made out of a Pringle's can, given it's shape, but I was wrong). I earnestly suggest she wait to give it to me on Mother's Day. "OK," she says, "where should I hide it until then?" Umm, I'm not really the person to ask?!

Well, the present from Zoe turned out to be this poster Zoe made, all rolled up (fooled me!). Can you read it? I'm BEST FOREVER MOM, and it's signed, "Your adopted child, Zoe!" Among my more common attributes, like "Beautiful every day" and "Rockin' at reading to me," I'm also "Excellent at helping me understand about adoption!"

The rest of MD was taken up with ballet recital, which was really fun but really busy. I'll take Mama bragging rights and post pictures soon.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

When Zoe first came home, I started a Mother's Day tradition of writing a note to her birth mother, and as Zoe got older, she began to write a note to her birth mother on Mother's Day. Maya was added to the tradition when she came along.

The notes are undeliverable, of course. They are kept in a drawer, waiting for the day we might be able to discover who their birth families are.

But this year, Zoe wanted to add something new to the tradition. She asked if we could burn the notes, in hopes that the smoke would carry the good wishes to China and find her birth mother, or find her birth mother in heaven if that's where she is. (She remembered seeing the burning of hell money and other paper objects at Buddhist temples when we were in China.)

Zoe decided that the only proper way to do it was to put the notes in lucky red envelopes (which, BTW, are really hard to burn!). She and Maya solemnly wrote their notes, with Zoe wishing she and her birth mother could spend Mother's Day together. And then we went outside (all fire safety precautions at hand!) and set fire to the envelopes. As the smoke rose, Zoe and Maya cheered. They're sure the smoke found a wind current to take it all the way to China.

Yes, you're in the right place -- we're still AdoptionTalk! My Mother's Day gift to myself -- I carved out some "me" time to do a bit of a redesign to the blog. I also added a "Follower" gadget -- click on the "Follow" button to the right, and let people know you're reading!

Saturday, May 9, 2009

The reason only 12 earthquake orphans have been adopted by new families is because authorities have been respecting the wishes of the children, the head of Sichuan civil affairs bureau told a press conference days before the one-year anniversary of the earthquake Thursday in Chengdu.

"Most of the orphans prefer to live with their family relatives, such as grandparents or uncle and aunt," Huang Mingquan said at the meeting. "The family relatives also strongly ask for the custody of these children," he said.

Sounds like the perfect solution -- after losing everything familiar, staying with relatives, people you know, seems like the best result. I posted before about a report suggesting that international adoption is not the right result following a crisis like earthquakes and tsunamis.

But I'm also not sure the Sichuan official's explanation is entirely accurate. Previous reports said that the only children who needed to be adopted were the 88 without relatives to care for them. It doesn't seem, then, that the reason only 12 have been adopted is that everyone else has relatives they'd rather be with. Where are the un-adopted 76 without relatives? And what about the previously-offered explanation that the reason placement is so slow is that many of the orphans are handicapped? (And no one has yet reported Jane Liedtke's explanation for why the quake orphans are not being adopted -- that they are considered unlucky.)

And what about the direct contradiction in the article above, with the Sichuan official also saying, "Other earthquake orphans, who do not have any family members or their family members were unable to take care of them, have been arranged to live in various social welfare institutions or boarding schools." So, we do have more than 12 orphans with no relatives, and they remain unadopted. It also seems that those 12 were adopted 6 months ago -- this November report said 12 quake orphans had been adopted at that time. Six months later, no more have been adopted?

Maybe the "respecting the wishes of the children" from the first paragraph is connected to children in boarding schools or SWIs -- they would rather stay there than be adopted by non-relatives? I could buy that explanation, especially for older children, if that's what the article actually said. But it doesn't; children's wishes is directly connected to staying with relatives, not anything else.

Color me confused. It seems that the good news is that the vast majority of the 630 children orphaned in the quake are in the care of relatives. More good news -- 12 children without relatives to care for them have found adoptive families. The bad news -- one year after the quake, 76 children have no families at all to care for them. And officials are not offering any explanation of why these 76 children have not been adopted, when 10,000 Chinese families came forward immediately after the quake offering to adopt.

Friday, May 8, 2009

PBSParents is offering an Expert Q & A on adoption. The expert is Dr. Michael Thompson, psychologist and adoptive parent. He shares his real-life introduction to adoption issues:

Twenty-four years ago, when my newly-adopted daughter, Joanna, was about four months old, I was reading an article about adoption in the Sunday paper. The author made the sweeping statement that all adopted children feel a life-long "sorrow"about having been given up by their birth parents. When I read this, it made me angry. Here I was, preparing to be a loving, caring, generous adoptive father to a beautiful baby girl. The idea that she would carry a sorrow with her for her entire life felt like an affront to my loving heart. As her excited psychologist father, wasn't it my mission to protect my daughter from pain?Wasn't it my job to make sure that she had a happy childhood and felt wonderful about being adopted by us?

I read the offending sentence out loud to our in-house expert on adoption: my wife, Theresa. As a malnourished baby weighing only eleven pounds at seven months, Theresa had been adopted from an orphanage outside Dublin, Ireland by an American family. She also has three adopted younger siblings. She was the expert, and I fully expected her to refute the author's sorrow argument. "This is a little much, isn't it?" I prompted. She looked me in the eye and said, "That sounds about right to me."

In the short piece he addresses the following questionsadoptive parents frequently have: How can I be sure that the loving bond I have with my adoptive child is as strong and close as the attachment (I imagine) between a biological child and birth parents? How do I raise a child whose temperament and learning style are so different from mine? When my child has behavioral or emotional difficulties in childhood, how can I tell whether they are "normal" problems or adoption-related problems? How do I talk to my child about his or her being adopted when it's hard to bring the subject up, or I'm not ready for it myself?

He's also addressing questions in the comments, so post a comment there if you want expert feedback on a burning issue.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Back in October, I posted a report about how family planning officials were amending the one child policy to allow parents who lost a child in the Sichuan earthquake to have another child.

One expert was dubious that the change would actually result in new births:

[Steven]Mosher, [China expert (BTW, you can read my take on Mosher's "expertise" here)] who has followed the one-child policy since its inception and described it in his most recent book “Population Control”, went on to comment that "The natural human reaction to losing a child is to have a make-up child as quickly as possible. But this will not be possible for most of the couples who have lost children to the quake, regardless of what the government policy is. Most women of childbearing age have been sterilized, or their spouses have been sterilized. Unless the government begins offering free tubal ligation and vasectomy reversals to these poor people, there will be no more children."

One year after the earthquake in Sichuan Province killed about 70,000 people and left 18,000 missing, mothers across the region are pregnant or giving birth again, aided by government medical teams dispensing fertility advice and reversing sterilizations.

Despite this report of new births, the article paints an overall depressing situation, with the government ignoring calls for investigations of why so many schools collapsed and hoping that new children will quiet those calls. And the projected future of these "replacement" children seems bleak:

Just 45 days old and swaddled in pink, Sang Ruifeng already has a purpose in life: to bring to justice those responsible for the death of his 11-year-old brother.

Ruifeng will have to ensure, his father said, that the Chinese government gives a full accounting for why thousands of students died in school collapses during the earthquake that devastated southwest China one year ago.

The brother that Ruifeng never knew was among 126 students crushed to death inFuxin No. 2 Primary School outside this lush farming town.

“I don’t feel happy at all,” the father, Sang Jun, said about the birth of his new son as his wife bounced the baby up and down in a neighbor’s home. “I was telling my wifetoday, if we can’t get justice, we’ll have our son carry on the quest for justice. This issue will be a burden on this child.”

* * *

On the edge of a wheat field here, Mr. Sang has built a new home to replace the one that crumbled during the earthquake. In one corner is a bedroom for his dead son, Xingpeng. Neatly stored inside are a framed photograph of the boy and his most treasured possessions — a fishing rod, white dancing shoes, a glass fish tank.

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Driving home from ballet rehearsal (recital is Sunday!) this evening, we were being exceptionally silly. Zoe was "interviewing" me, and after asking my name and profession, she asked me, "And which simple machines do you use every day?" What?! "Uh, incline plane?"

I then interviewed Maya, and asked her to describe her personality (which is really difficult to define without using the word "personality!") -- "pretty, snuggly, funny." OK, so I asked her to describe her sister's personality --"mean, pretty, waterproof." Waterproof?! Where does she come up with this stuff?!

Then I interviewed Zoe, asking her to describe her personality --"smart, educational (!), mad . . . ." "Mad?" I asked, sounding very surprised since she was giggling like crazy. "What are you mad about?"

Recently, my six-year-old daughter snuggled up against me and returned to our ongoing discussion about how we became a family. I was hoping I’d answered all her questions clearly, when she suddenly implored, “Oh Mommy, let’s not talk about that terrible thing!” I was amazed that she could look upon one of my happiest memories as “that terrible thing.” Then she blurted out, “What if someone else got me? What if you weren’t my mom?”Now I understood. Patiently, I told her how she is the only child for me and reiterated how we were meant to be together.

OK, I can see an answer to the child's concern that emphasized how perfectly matched we are. It's that comforting answer about belonging that I mentioned in "Meant to Be" II. The answer here is heavy on the destiny theme for me, and I'd be happier if she'd stopped at the "only child for me" point -- that "meant to be together" thing is too close to the "meant to be abandoned" thing I've posted about.

But then we read further, and discover why the author is so convinced she and her child were meant to be together, that her daughter was not meant to be with her birth parents:

Years ago, when I first began the process of adopting, I spoke with some of my philosophy professors about the theme of adoption and destiny. One said that international adoption may be a new kind of conception, in which “a being may be going through whatever body they can” to arrive in the family and culture where they belong. In other words, destiny will bring them to a new kind of family not based on biology.

I have never forgotten this image and was surprised when I found it echoed in a story from The Lost Daughters of China, by Karin Evans. This time, however, it was one of the Chinese facilitators of the author’s travel group who was voicing this belief. “We have a saying in China,” he declared. “We say that maybe these babies grew in the wrong stomachs, but now they have found the right parents.”

Great, even philosophy professors and Chinese adoption facilitators buy into "destiny!" But how disturbing is that argument? Birth mother as a pass-through body -- the baby "going through whatever body they can" to reach the family and culture they really belong in? I can't imagine a more morally bankrupt philosophy to justify adoption. And how about the suggestion that this somehow works only in international adoption? Apparently these foreign birth mothers qualify as nothing more than incubators. The "exotic Other," anyone?

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

There were some great questions and comments to the Ten Commandments post, so I thought I'd bring the discussion "above the fold!"

First, I want to share some specifics from Telling the Truth to Your Adopted or Foster Child, for talking about abandonment to our kids. The book authors have over 50 collective years of experience in adoption, mostly in post-placement services. They quote Dee Paddock, "a nationally respected therapist and adoptive parent, [who] says that adoptive parents need to see sharing their child's story as a process in telling and understanding -- not just relating the facts of the event. 'Whatever happened in the child's life experience that led to adoptive placement for that child, from the very beginning and in every stage they need to hear the words, 'your birth parents couldn't parent you,'' says Paddock."

Here's some suggested language for different development levels from Paddock:

Preschool Years: Your birth mother couldn't take care of you and wanted you to be safe. So she found a safe place to put you where safe adults would come and take care of you.

Early Elementary: We feel sad sometimes, and even mad sometimes, that we cannot give you any more information. Do you ever have any sad or mad feelings about not knowing anything? It is important that you understand that you are not responsible for the decision your parents made.

If a single mother: Being a single mother in Korea (or whatever country) may be extremely difficult. Single parents may have difficulty finding jobs and being able to provide for their child.

If a large family: Sometimes a family has too many children and is not able to provide for all of them. When the newest baby arrives, as you did, your parents might have felt they had no other choice but to take you to people who could care for you.

Middle School Years: Although we do not have information directly about your birth parents, we can explore all about your country and learn to understand why birth parents had to make such difficult decisions. When you think about your birth parents, what do you think about? Are you ever sad or angry that you don't know anything about them? What would you like us to do to help you? (Parents can begin to bring into the conversation the societal, economic, and cultural aspects of their child's country that would force birth parents to make such adecision.)

Preteen: Continue using educational resources to fill in a child's cultural and ethnic background. Continue to ask the questions mentioned above in greater depth. Consider locating a peer support group of other adopted preteens and teens that deals with open discussion regarding adoption issues.

A couple of notes from me -- by "middle school years," I think they mean middle elementary school years. I think true middle school -- 7th & 8th grade -- would be way too late for this discussion. Zoe at age 7 asked the big "WHY" question, "Why couldn't my birth parents keep me?" She was ready then for the discussion of the one child policy & social preference for boys, and other issues like poverty and single parenthood that might have lead to her relinquishment.

Long before that age, Zoe knew the circumstances of her abandonment. She never reacted negatively to it; in fact, she takes a lot of comfort from the story of "the box." I'm not sure why, but the box she was found in is important to her. She loves to hear that she was dressed in three layers of clothing with a little hat on her head, even though it was a warm day. We have visited her finding place, and she could see how populous the area is. Maya likes to hear that she was found in front of a hospital, and that it was a good place to put a baby because people in hospitals know how to take care of babies.

I know some finding places are not as positive; even so, it's important to tell about it. I've already mentioned one reason -- children WILL hear about it elsewhere if they don't hear it from their parents first. In fact, this is what I said in the comments to the Ten Commandments post (in case you missed it!):

I sympathize with the desire to protect your child from hurtful information, but I say you HAVE to tell. She WILL hear about it from others -- too many people know about the situation in China. It won't take someone hearing it from you and repeating it to her. SOMEONE will say to her, "They hate girls in China. They just leave them by the side of the road to die. You're lucky someone found you and took you to an orphanage." I can almost guarantee it -- people said it in front of Zoe from the time she was 3, and when we went to China when she was 4.5 to adopt baby sister, the guide threw around "abandonment" like it was the word of the day! IT WILL HAPPEN!

So you have a choice -- do you want her to hear it from someone else, or from you, who will be there to give her emotional support and to express it as positively as possible?

Telling about the abandonment is also important in explaining why it is we have no information about the birth parents. Zoe knows other adopted kids (including a child adopted from Korea) who know who their birth parents are, and I'm not sure she'd believe me when I say we have no idea if she didn't have the backstory of abandonment. One of the things Betsy Keefer said at the AAC Conference presentation on the Ten Commandment of Telling is that developmentally around age 6-8 adopted kids will sometimes think that perhaps their adoptive parents stole them from their birth parents. So it's important to be specific about how the child was placed for adoption.

Mahmee asks about resources to help in telling,and I agree with her that books and movies are great jumping-off points for discussion. My favorite tool is Beth O'Malley's My China Workbook, an interactive lifebook tool. As I've posted before, the girls loved, loved, loved to fill out the pages, and now love, love, love to read through their books. It is really so much more effective than the lifebook I made for Zoe, since they got to make it themselves.

Here's a short list of China-specific children's books that deal pretty well with abandonment, as well as the social preference for boys and one child policy:

Remember the other points about telling -- let your child be angry without joining in. You can't be condemning about the fact and circumstances of the abandonment. Go for matter-of-fact and neutral. And do not lie. That means saying a lot of "I don't knows" for China adoptive parents. It's OK to speculate, so long as you label it as speculation.

Here's one way to explain the one child policy: "I don't know why your birth parents weren't able to take care of you the way a parent would want to, but there is a grown-up rule in China about how many kids a family can have. If a family has more children than the rule allows, they can get in trouble. That's one reason why kids in China end up in an orphanage. I don't know if that was the reason you did, but I think it could be the reason." (I just read this to Zoe to see if she thought it was a good explanation, and she says it is. But she also wants me to add, "My daughter is mad about the rule. She wishes she could have stayed in China to see what life is like there and be adopted when she was older." There.)

No doubt it's admirable that celebrities are rescuing abandoned children from poverty-stricken lands ravaged by war and natural disaster and from places where AIDS is spreading quickly. They are giving a whole new life filled with opportunity to children with otherwise bleak futures. Celebs are drawing attention to worthy causes, and they have also led Americans to look beyond the option to adopt a healthy white infant, which is actually quite difficult to do in the United States.

Great. Yet another article that touts the notion that my children are charity cases. But after all, they are "worthy causes;" I've saved them from a "bleak future." I'm "admirable" to be "rescuing" them (actually, the celebs are "admirable," I'm merely following the trend because the celebs "drew attention" to the "worthy cause"). Grrrrrrr.

But wait! There is another, even more noble than I: someone who "stepped into a New York City orphanage to pick out a kid whose mom died on the streets from a drug overdose." Sigh.

Monday, May 4, 2009

Interesting article trying to get to the bottom of the subtle racism faced by Asian Americans. The article examines racial microaggressions, defined as “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults that potentially have harmful or unpleasant psychological impact on the target person or group.”

Simply stated, microaggressions are brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of color because they belong to a racial minority group. These exchanges are so pervasive and automatic in daily interactions that they are often dismissed and glossed over as being innocuous. What constitutes racial microaggressions, how they impact people of color and the strategies used to deal with them have not been well conceptualized or researched.

The study relies on a focus group, and categorized mircroaggressions identified by the group members as (a) alien in own land, (b) ascription of intelligence, (c) exoticization of Asian women, (d) invalidation of interethnic differences, (e) denial of racial reality, (f) pathologizing cultural values/communication styles, (g) second class citizenship, and (h) invisibility.

A more general article about racial microaggressions by the same lead author can be found here.

The book is really good, covering why to tell as well as how to tell. And there's lots more than the Ten Commandments, but that's what the presentation focused on, so I will, too. We've covered many of these before (see here, for instance), but always good to get reinforcement.

I. Do not lie.

This is a no-brainer, right? It's your child's story, and they are entitled to have it told straight. Omissions are OK if developmentally necessary (but see IV), but no lies. Kids have a way of finding out the truth, and then we've broken trust. Betsie said that adopted kids tend to snoop more than non-adopted kids (curiosity about their background), so it's not at all unusual for them to ferret out the truth before they are told.

II. Tell information in an age-appropriate way.

Of course, but HOW?! Betsie gave some examples of telling a child a very hard truth at different ages, building to the whole truth-- that the birth mom was drug-addicted and a prostitute, and the child was removed from her care because she left her alone and neglected her.

Age 3: Your first mommy couldn't take care of you. She wasn't ready to be a mommy.

Age 7: Your birth mommy had trouble taking care of herself. She wasn't able to take care of you. Neighbors were worried about you and called the social worker.

Age10: Your birth mom made a bad decision and started using drugs. She couldn't think well when she was using drugs and made even more bad decisions. Sometimes she left you alone. That wasn't safe for you.

Age 12: Your birth mom felt sick when she couldn't get drugs. She could not hold a job. She needed money, so she sold herself through prostitution. She left you alone when she met customers or bought drugs. Neighbors called the social worker, and a judge agreed you needed a safe home to grow up in.

III. Allow the child to be angry without joining in.

You know how you can diss your brother, but no one else can? Same goes when your child is angry with birth parents. Acknowledge the hurt and anger without bad-mouthing the birth parents.

IV. Share all information by the time the child is 12.

It's important to give the child all the information before the teenage years. That's the key period for identity formation, and they need all available information before that point. And, by the teenage years, kids don't believe a word their parents say! So you better get the information out while they are still listening.

V. Remember the child knows more than you think.

See snooping, above! Not to mention, if anyone in the family knows it, chances are your child has overheard parts of the story and are filling in the blanks on her own. Or someone else -- older siblings, school friends who heard something from their parents -- is telling your child. And they are likely not doing it in a kind and understanding way. Even if they are, the game of "rumour" should remind you how skewed the story will be by the time your child hears it.

Also, your child is probably developmentally ready to hear parts of the story before you think they are. Although parents are experts in their child, their reluctance to share hard truths and desire to protect the child might lead to underestimating their ability to understand.

VI. If information is negative, use a third party professional.

Choose wisely, interview beforehand, and discuss parameters of telling. AND you must stay when the therapist tells, so that you can offer your child's emotional support, so you know the details shared to clarify later anything your child missed or misunderstood, so you can demostrate to your child than even though you know "the worst" about them, you still love them and are there for them.

VII. Use positive adoption language.

It's important to model positive attitudes about adoption, and that starts with language. Your child relies on you to teach them that language, too.

VIII. Don't impose value judgments.

Even horrific information needs to be conveyed in a neutral manner. Conveying negative judgments of birth family or their actions will be seen as a rejection by adopted children -- if you don't like my birth parents, you don't like me.

And what we see as terribly negative information may not be that for the child. Betsie's example was when she was called in by a family to share the fact that their son was conceived as a result of rape. Everyone was surprised that the boy was actually happy to hear it -- he had internalized ideas of his birth mother as promiscuous, and was glad to know it wasn't so.

IX. Initiate conversation about adoption.

Waiting until kids ask questions isn't adequate. Look for opportunities to raise the issue of adoption:

1. Watch movies/programs with adoption themes with your child and draw parallels and contrasts to your child's story; use as a springboard to further discussion;

2. Use key times of the year (birthday, Mother's Day, gotcha day, adoption day) to let your child know that you are thinking about their birth family;

3. Comment on your child's positive characteristics and wonder aloud whether they got that characteristic from birth family members;

4. Include the birth family when congratulating your child for accomplishments -- "I'm sure they would be as proud as we are."

X. The child should be in control of his story outside the family.

Intimate details should only be shared at your child's discretion. Make sure, though, that your child realizes the difference between "private" and "secret." Secrets connote shame, and you don't want your child to think negative facts are shameful.

I have found it! The magic elixir! The special ingredient that turns my mediocre stir-fry into something authentically Chinese! It is SHRIMP PASTE!!!!! (OK, it is probably shrimp sauce, but the label on the jar says "shrimp paste.")

As I've mentioned before, each time we go to the Asian market I pick up another jar or bottle or can of cooking sauce. This last time it was shrimp paste, and oh wow! I hit the jackpot! I made fried noodles, and threw in about a tablespoon of shrimp paste with the half sesame oil/half regular oil I use. It smelled WONDERFUL, and it tasted even better.

Fair warning if you decide to try it, two days later, my house still smells like shrimp paste! That's fine by me, because it is a wonderfully nostalgic aroma that takes us back to our time in China.

Friday, May 1, 2009

May is API Heritage Month! Someone gave me a compliment recently -- she said she knew that the stuff I post here and the links and blogs and all are out there, but I let her be lazy by digging it all out for her. So, if you're feeling a little lazy, here are a few sources for finding information to help you celebrate and learn more about API heritage in America:

I've tried to give a mix of sites; some are general-purpose, interesting-all-year websites, others are specific to teaching kids history about the API experience in America. I've also included a site to information about the Chinese Exclusion Act.

One of my usual soapboxes is that China adoptive parents tend to emphasize Chinese-in-Ancient-China history and culture(you know, silk pajamas and fans and Mulan) over Chinese-American history and culture. Not that I have an objection to silk pajamas and fans and Mulan -- we do all that, too! It's when that's ALL one does that I have a problem. I think it's important to connect our kids to the immigrant experience -- they are, after all, first-generation Chinese immigrants! -- and the history of the Chinese in America. So, we need to start with that bar to immigration and why it happened. End of soapbox . . . . for now!

In her presentation at the AAC Conference, Margie of Third Mom struck a chord with me when she talked about what she was told about Korean birth parents as she waited to adopt her children from Korea. I can only paraphrase, but it was essentially that Korean birth mothers care more about family honor than their children born out of wedlock, that they don't experience the relinquishment as we would (a story Margie believed for a time, as did I, and then came to reject, as have I).

When I interviewed the two birthmothers last year, both matter-of-factly recounted their stories. There was no tears of remorse, although both expressed some regret that they had abandoned their children. Both acknowledged that if confronted with the same situation again, they would abandon their child again. Neither birthmother was very emotional when recounting her story, but rather showed a sense of consignment [sic]. They did what had to be done in both of their situations.

* * *

It is also interesting to note that a large percentage of families in China turn over raising of their child(ren) to the grand-parents, while the husband and wife work.

* * *

Personally, I could not imagine ever giving up my child to another to raise. . . .

There was no emotional regret in any of these stories, simply an acceptance that life required these decisions. No apologies, no tears, no looking back. I'm not saying that the Chinese don't love their children, but it is not often the emotionally-invested love that we in the West feel.

Yes, culture is a powerful thing (it might, for example, require that in talking to a virtual stranger we behave unemotionally and matter-of-factly, even when describing painful events!). But these versions of "birth mother" -- the one Margie was given and the one Brian provides -- paint them as not just culturally different, but as less than human. No emotion, no regret, no tears, no love -- or at least, not the kind of love we adoptive parents in the West experience. I've read it on adoptive parent forums, too, how these Chinese birth mothers throw away their children with no more feeling than when throwing out the trash.

These representations of foreign birth mothers allow us to divorce ourselves from the experience of these birth mothers, to minimize their pain, and to justify how much better off our children are with us than with them. So that we can continue to ignore them even as we internalize how painful the loss of these children would be to us, their relinquishment has to be seen as wholly voluntary, desired, accepted. We have to believe they have moved on, that they feel no pain. They are "the Other," the person who is understood only according to their difference from ourselves. It becomes very easy to do when the birth mother is from another country; we have a long history of "the exotic Other" as justifying all sorts of Western colonial intervention. "They" are just not like "us."

But we do it in domestic adoption, too, with birth mothers raised in the good ol' U.S. of A. We say, "She is a saint, she showed the ultimate in mother's love;" and then we follow up with, "I could never have done that." As Brian Stuy puts it, "Personally, I could not imagine ever giving up my child to another to raise." I don't think it's meant as a compliment -- it's not that she's so much more noble, so much more saintly, so much more loving than I, that I could never do that. She is different from me, she is less than me, she is "the Other."

In writing this, I'm focusing on the big picture, how we construct the picture of "birth mother." Some relinquishing mothers may be just as Brian Stuy describes them -- unemotional, matter-of-fact, not looking back, etc. But then, there are parenting mothers who could be described this way as well! I think, though, that the happy-happy-joy-joy version of adoption can survive only if we paint birth mothers in a particular way. And I think many international adoptive parents are highly invested in that version of birth mother as "the exotic Other."

I write this not to lay blame, but to suggest more compassion, more understanding, more "Other"-love.